Talk:Norman (Me and My Monsters)
Necessary? A while back there was a decision to make everything Henson-related post-2004 one page only. So should we keep this page? Edward Rankin 20:47, January 31, 2011 (UTC) :This is a page for an animatronic puppet character created by Jim Henson's Creature Shop (also known as a Creature). The human characters (such as Eddie) shouldn't get their own pages; nor would other related items (such as merchandise). While we don't cover post-2004 projects of the Henson Company or Creature Shop in detail beyond one page; but we do cover individual Creatures (and any Muppets) created by them pre- and/or post-2004. For example, we have separate pages for It, Adolf Pigeon, Vogons and several other post-2004 Creatures. -- Brad D. (talk) 22:45, January 31, 2011 (UTC) ::Wait, no we don't. This is a post-2004 Henson show, just like Pajanimals, Late Night Buffet with Augie and Del and The Skrumps. It gets one page. The three monster pages need to get merged back into Me and My Monsters, same as with Pajanimals and Tinseltown. -- Danny (talk) 01:25, February 1, 2011 (UTC) :::Sorry for creating the pages then. I thought we were still covering creatures built by the Creature Shop. I know we don't cover the shop's soft-puppets (Panjanimals, Puppet Up) or digital puppets (Skrumps, Sid); nor the company's non-puppet work (Unstable Fables, Sam Plenty)...but I thought animatronic Creatures from the Creature Shop were still within the realm of the wiki. And I thought the three monsters from the show were Creatures - like the cast of Dinosaurs, the aliens from Aliens in the Family, or the Vogons in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Sorry if I misunderstood. -- Brad D. (talk) 03:02, February 2, 2011 (UTC) ::::It really has little to do with Creature coverage, Brad. The aesthetic strikes me as pretty much the same as the other shows Danny mentioned, and as we settled on Muppets vs Creatures years ago, stylized and symbolic versus detailed and realistic, clearly these are puppets (colorful cartoony figures) that we would have classified as Muppets if the company hadn't sold the rights to the name (which we wouldn't with the other examples, though admittedly Aliens in the Family came closer at times but these are still ten times more cartoonish than that). That and our old "Don't create multiple pages if it's repeating presskit type info that's all housed on the main page anyway" policy, or finding the best way to present information. This is nothing new or exclusive to Creatures or post-2004 stuff, Brad. See Inner Tube for example. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 03:30, February 2, 2011 (UTC) :::::I'll admit these weren't the greatest articles; and I'm not against merging them for that reason. While the animatronics characters aren't hyper-realistic, I thought the 3 monsters were still Creatures - cause I would put them in the same category as the casts of The Country Bears, Dinosaurs and Aliens in the Family, or Rico and The Honey Monster (all of which we've called Creatures). Sorry if I misunderstood things. -- Brad D. (talk) 03:56, February 2, 2011 (UTC) :::::::Put them side by side and the contrast is pretty obvious (and we cover it in great detail on Muppets vs. Creatures; although stylized, and the Honey Monster is closer, all the examples you keep tossing out still strive for the more realistic "if you cut them, you can believe they would bleed" aesthetic, quoting Jim Henson's comment on the bottom of the page, down to taxidermy eyes in several cases and detailed facial and mouth mechanisms, chins, skin, etc.). We've had middle grounds before (as with Mother Goose say), but if it's obviously less realistic than Fughetta Faffner and friends, I think that makes it pretty clear (remember also, as it says on the page, we decided to base it on aesthetic more than whether a character is animatronic or not, and the Creature Shop is pretty much Henson's only puppet shop these days so that alone doesn't mean anything; they've even done some work for hire on actual Muppet stuff still, like Sesame Street.) It can be tricky sometimes, and I know you get annoyed whenever your work is merged, but don't be afraid to ask for opinions first, Brad. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:21, February 2, 2011 (UTC) For me, it's not about Creatures vs Muppets aesthetic. It's that we have limited coverage for Henson's post-2004 projects. We have those on one page, and we don't create new categories for them. If you mention other post-2004 Creature Shop projects that we have pages on, my advice would still be the same: merge them with the production. -- Danny (talk) 19:25, February 2, 2011 (UTC) :Yeah, they are in a gray area - not as complex as Dinosaurs but not as simple as The Hoobs. I'm fine with saying they aren't "creatures" and are just puppets from the Creature Shop. Now the only other post-2004 Creature Shop projects that we have multiple pages on (that I could find) are Five Children and It Characters, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Characters, and Adolf Pigeon/The Producers. Maybe merging them and just sticking to one page for any post-2004 Henson Co. project (creatures, puppets, digital, animated, or live action) would be best. We don't have any yet, but would we allow pages on each creature from Where the Wild Things Are? -- Brad D. (talk) 20:18, February 2, 2011 (UTC)